Salary Cap: Pittsburgh Penguins Salary Cap Thread - JJ and Letang drama

[Honour Over Glory]

Also, I'm 100% sure this is how Mike Sullivan sees Jack Johnson...

 

[DesertPenguin]

The HOCKEY Guy.

who lives in his mom's basement and uses a white board.

I actually really enjoy his content, despite him admittedly being a Bruins fan and very much not a fan of the Pens.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Examining the Wild’s options: What to do about a complicated goalie situation?

If this is true, I am LIVID that JR didn't do this. Absolutely infuriated. For anyone who doesn't have a subscription, Guerin apparently wanted Jarry in exchange for Zucker and was willing to also swap Johnson for Stalock in the deal if JR included Jarry. He refused.

 

[OswaldBates]

Examining the Wild’s options: What to do about a complicated goalie situation?

If this is true, I am LIVID that JR didn't do this. Absolutely infuriated. For anyone who doesn't have a subscription, Guerin apparently wanted Jarry in exchange for Zucker and was willing to also swap Johnson for Stalock in the deal if JR included Jarry. He refused.

so then you have Murray & what ? DeSmith & then lose Murray & have DeSmith as your starter !? KOOL

 

[Andy99]

Examining the Wild’s options: What to do about a complicated goalie situation?

If this is true, I am LIVID that JR didn't do this. Absolutely infuriated. For anyone who doesn't have a subscription, Guerin apparently wanted Jarry in exchange for Zucker and was willing to also swap Johnson for Stalock in the deal if JR included Jarry. He refused.

why are you livid? He’s not going to give up a very good NHL goalie when the Pens are trying to have a PO push and have no one behind Murray but CDS...no guarantee they’d be able to trade for someone else...he values Jarry...hopefully he’s not trading him to Minn for a 2nd either this offseason

 

[Peat]

Examining the Wild’s options: What to do about a complicated goalie situation?

If this is true, I am LIVID that JR didn't do this. Absolutely infuriated. For anyone who doesn't have a subscription, Guerin apparently wanted Jarry in exchange for Zucker and was willing to also swap Johnson for Stalock in the deal if JR included Jarry. He refused.

Ooph and wow.

 

[Empoleon8771]

why are you livid? He’s not going to give up a very good NHL goalie when the Pens are trying to have a PO push and have no one behind Murray but CDS...no guarantee they’d be able to trade for someone else...he values Jarry...hopefully he’s not trading him to Minn for a 2nd either this offseason

Because:

1. JR could have gotten out of JJ's contract
2. JR could have likely acquired Zucker without trading both Addison and the 1st

JR's an absolute moron if he turned a deal around Jarry and Johnson for Zucker and Stalock down. That offer is 100% selling high on Jarry, it would have been an extremely shrewd move. Now they didn't go into detail on what the rest of the deal looked like, so that may change, but I have a really hard time coming up with what else would have been added to make that deal a bad one in my eyes.

Ooph and wow.

Did I miss anything important from the article? I got that description from reddit.

 

[Gurglesons]

Examining the Wild’s options: What to do about a complicated goalie situation?

If this is true, I am LIVID that JR didn't do this. Absolutely infuriated. For anyone who doesn't have a subscription, Guerin apparently wanted Jarry in exchange for Zucker and was willing to also swap Johnson for Stalock in the deal if JR included Jarry. He refused.

Not sure that deal would have been kind to us. Stalock is terrible and we’d be forced to pay Murray regardless of how he performed.

And it doesn’t make sense from a cap perspective because we would have had Galchenyuk still.

 

[Turin]

Examining the Wild’s options: What to do about a complicated goalie situation?

If this is true, I am LIVID that JR didn't do this. Absolutely infuriated. For anyone who doesn't have a subscription, Guerin apparently wanted Jarry in exchange for Zucker and was willing to also swap Johnson for Stalock in the deal if JR included Jarry. He refused.

Trading Jarry this year makes no sense for a team that wanted to win the Cup and probably lost a lot of faith in Murray.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

I wouldn't have done that Jarry + JJ for Zucker + Stalock deal either.

We have options regarding JJ. It's just up to JR whether or not he recognizes JJ is a truly bad player on a bad contract, and accepts having to lose an asset to move him. Sure, that's what the proposed deal was, essentially, but I'd rather that asset not be our present and future starting goalie.

 

[Turin]

Because:

1. JR could have gotten out of JJ's contract
2. JR could have likely acquired Zucker without trading both Addison and the 1st

JR's an absolute moron if he turned a deal around Jarry and Johnson for Zucker and Stalock down. That offer is 100% selling high on Jarry, it would have been an extremely shrewd move. Now they didn't go into detail on what the rest of the deal looked like, so that may change, but I have a really hard time coming up with what else would have been added to make that deal a bad one in my eyes.



Did I miss anything important from the article? I got that description from reddit.

Dude, we’re looking at Jarry as the guy going toward. It didn’t make sense to trade him, as much as we all want to be out from that JJ deal.

 

[Andy99]

Because:

1. JR could have gotten out of JJ's contract
2. JR could have likely acquired Zucker without trading both Addison and the 1st

JR's an absolute moron if he turned a deal around Jarry and Johnson for Zucker and Stalock down. That offer is 100% selling high on Jarry, it would have been an extremely shrewd move. Now they didn't go into detail on what the rest of the deal looked like, so that may change, but I have a really hard time coming up with what else would have been added to make that deal a bad one in my eyes.



Did I miss anything important from the article? I got that description from reddit.

I’m guessing:
1) he values Jarry more than you do, and is probably trading Murray because of it
2) he values JJ more than any of us, which is even more ridiculous but maybe his comments on JJ were not just blowing smoke

he loves goaltending depth and he’s spent two years defending JJ...he probably doesn’t think of him as a cap dump just to get Zucker...I mean, I hated the deal for Zucker, but then again I’ve already said that I don’t value 28-year-old Zucker with four more years on his contract as much as I valued the first and our top prospect...I didn’t want him to trade for Zucker for a huge return, and as we all saw, he was fine in the POs but not a difference maker...

 

[OswaldBates]

Ooph and wow.

yes Because Trading Jarry & getting Stalock who was & is Garbage would have been SO killer

 

[Empoleon8771]

Not sure that deal would have been kind to us. Stalock is terrible and we’d be forced to pay Murray regardless of how he performed.

And it doesn’t make sense from a cap perspective because we would have had Galchenyuk still.

You could have just dumped Galchenyuk in a separate deal, and I'm willing to bet that either the 1st or Addison wouldn't have been included had JR included that Jarry swap.

Dude, we’re looking at Jarry as the guy going toward. It didn’t make sense to trade him, as much as we all want to be out from that JJ deal.

Okay? They could have killed 2 birds with 1 stone, get a great return for one of their redundant goalies and get out of JJ's contract. JR didn't do it, so I'm pissed at JR.

Saying it doesn't make sense to trade Jarry acts like picking Jarry over Murray is the only option. That's not true. I would have loved for JR to get that good of a return for Jarry and also get out of JJ's contract. That's great roster management, that's the definition of selling high.

Trading Jarry this year makes no sense for a team that wanted to win the Cup and probably lost a lot of faith in Murray.

If you lost faith in Murray, trade for Lehner at the deadline like Vegas did. Or acquire another goalie at the deadline.

 

[66-30-33]

I would have done that deal to get out of JJ easily.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I really have no idea why people would say no to dumping JJ's contract and acquiring a top-6 forward for less futures in exchange for a hot goalie who had 30 elite games in the NHL. I don't care which goalie they keep, I just want to move the guy with the better trade value. That kind of trade value is the exact kind of value I want to go with a more expensive starter. That's selling high on a guy having a hot run, and it would have been incredibly smart for JR to pull that off.

 

[Turin]

You could have just dumped Galchenyuk in a separate deal, and I'm willing to bet that either the 1st or Addison wouldn't have been included had JR included that Jarry swap.



Okay? They could have killed 2 birds with 1 stone, get a great return for one of their redundant goalies and get out of JJ's contract. JR didn't do it, so I'm pissed at JR.

Saying it doesn't make sense to trade Jarry acts like picking Jarry over Murray is the only option. That's not true. I would have loved for JR to get that good of a return for Jarry and also get out of JJ's contract. That's great roster management, that's the definition of selling high.



If you lost faith in Murray, trade for Lehner at the deadline like Vegas did. Or acquire another goalie at the deadline.

It’s not great roster management if Murray sucks going forward.

They didn’t lose faith in Murray enough to spend assets on another goalie, which is what you want from this trade that never happened, to save a 1st/Addison. What if Murray demands big money and Lehner walks? Jary was virtually untouchable and I’m glad JR didn’t lock himself into over paying Murray like that.

 

[Peat]

Did I miss anything important from the article? I got that description from reddit.

"It’s believed Guerin attempted early in his first season to acquire Jarry in the original Jason Zucker trade. That being the case, most likely Stalock would have gone to Pittsburgh and the Wild probably would have had to take a defenseman like Jack Johnson back. Remember, there was talk, too, that when Phil Kessel wouldn’t waive his no-trade clause to come to Minnesota last summer in a Zucker deal that the Wild also would have had to take Johnson back."

Now we don't know whether that deal would have still worked without Kessel - don't know whether Jarry + JJ for Zucker + Stalock was on the table, or whether it'd have been Kessel + Jarry + JJ for Zucker + Stalock - I don't think Russo's wording is clear - but it's a pretty intriguing twist.

He also says the Pens would like to upgrade on defence this summer, which could mean a number of things from "we've got an empty spot left by Schultz" to "plz let us move JJ" to "I demand a BAMF".

 

[Andy99]

Chicago had to do a three team deal to trade Lehner and they got back two young prospects, a 2nd round pick and goalie Malcolm Subban...no way could the Pens offer a 2nd (have none this year) or a good prospect back for Lehner and they wouldn’t have had a goalie to trade since Jarry already would’ve went for Zucker...Zucker isn’t worth any of these deals imo

 

[Turin]

I really have no idea why people would say no to dumping JJ's contract and acquiring a top-6 forward for less futures in exchange for a hot goalie who had 30 elite games in the NHL. I don't care which goalie they keep, I just want to move the guy with the better trade value. That kind of trade value is the exact kind of value I want to go with a more expensive starter. That's selling high on a guy having a hot run, and it would have been incredibly smart for JR to pull that off.

They care what goalie they keep because Murray is due for an overpayment.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

Examining the Wild’s options: What to do about a complicated goalie situation?

If this is true, I am LIVID that JR didn't do this. Absolutely infuriated. For anyone who doesn't have a subscription, Guerin apparently wanted Jarry in exchange for Zucker and was willing to also swap Johnson for Stalock in the deal if JR included Jarry. He refused.

Good.

Imagine being stuck having to over pay a shitty goalie like Murray and then having a guy like Stalock outplay his ass and MM is untradeable while Jarry goes on to be a success in Minnesota.

 

[Empoleon8771]

It’s not great roster management if Murray sucks going forward.

They didn’t lose faith in Murray enough to spend assets on another goalie, which is what you want from this trade that never happened, to save a 1st/Addison. What if Murray demands big money and Lehner walks? Jary was virtually untouchable and I’m glad JR didn’t lock himself into over paying Murray like that.

There is no reason to expect Murray to suck going forward. You're happy that JR didn't trade Jarry so he wouldn't lock himself into paying Jarry, but you're fine with him trading Murray and locking himself into paying Jarry?

"It’s believed Guerin attempted early in his first season to acquire Jarry in the original Jason Zucker trade. That being the case, most likely Stalock would have gone to Pittsburgh and the Wild probably would have had to take a defenseman like Jack Johnson back. Remember, there was talk, too, that when Phil Kessel wouldn’t waive his no-trade clause to come to Minnesota last summer in a Zucker deal that the Wild also would have had to take Johnson back."

Now we don't know whether that deal would have still worked without Kessel - don't know whether Jarry + JJ for Zucker + Stalock was on the table, or whether it'd have been Kessel + Jarry + JJ for Zucker + Stalock - I don't think Russo's wording is clear - but it's a pretty intriguing twist.

He also says the Pens would like to upgrade on defence this summer, which could mean a number of things from "we've got an empty spot left by Schultz" to "plz let us move JJ" to "I demand a BAMF".

If it was earlier in the season, I understand it and am confused more:

1. If it was before his breakout, maybe Guerin was only valuing Jarry like a throw-in? JR waiting was a good thing, because Jarry is more valuable now than he was then.
2. But why was JR worrying about keeping Jarry during the off-season when there weren't concerns with Murray? You had Murray-DeSmith during the off-season, and scoffing at including Jarry for Zucker just seems weird.

 

[Big Friggin Dummy]

Jarry is the better of the two (three, including Stalock) goalies by a good margin, and he can play the puck. He's the starter now and moving forward. I don't think you can really justify moving the guy at this point, and I fully expect Murray to be the guy gone by the time next season starts.

I get that JJ is literal putrescence on skates, and I want him gone yesterday. I just wouldn't have dealt Jarry to move him. I don't really think we lost a gem in Addison, and while the 1st hurts (and could hurt a lot more if we're out of the playoffs next year), I'm fine with what we payed for Zucker.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Chicago had to do a three team deal to trade Lehner and they got back two young prospects, a 2nd round pick and goalie Malcolm Subban...no way could the Pens offer a 2nd (have none this year) or a good prospect back for Lehner and they wouldn’t have had a goalie to trade since Jarry already would’ve went for Zucker...Zucker isn’t worth any of these deals imo

The prospects that the Hawks got back for Lehner were basically nothing prospects.

They care what goalie they keep because Murray is due for an overpayment.

Just because fans are assuming that Murray is going to want a fortune to extend doesn't make that true.

JR could have made an absolutely awesome deal for Zucker if that was the case. The Penguins very well could still have Addison or their 1st if they would have done Jarry for Zucker. I would easily take that and Murray being the starter, because I'd easily trade Jarry this off-season for a 1st if the opportunity came up.

Jarry is the better of the two (three, including Stalock) goalies by a good margin, and he can play the puck. He's the starter now and moving forward. I don't think you can really justify moving the guy at this point, and I fully expect Murray to be the guy gone by the time next season starts.

I get that JJ is literal putrescence on skates, and I want him gone yesterday. I just wouldn't have dealt Jarry to move him. I don't really think we lost a gem in Addison, and while the 1st hurts (and could hurt a lot more if we're out of the playoffs next year), I'm fine with what we payed for Zucker.

No he's not.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Good.

Imagine being stuck having to over pay a shitty goalie like Murray and then having a guy like Stalock outplay his ass and MM is untradeable while Jarry goes on to be a success in Minnesota.

I'm willing to bet you won't be saying the same thing if/when Jarry comes crashing back down to earth and Murray returns to his career normal.